Apr 27, 2009, 9:53 AM
Annie B. Daniel Sarr, the Human Resources Manager of Guaranty Trust Bank, recently testified as the second defence witness against Mam-Nabou Samba, plaintiff, who sued Guaranty Trust Bank (
The plaintiff, Mam-Nabou Samba claimed special damages of D500,000 as general damages for breach of contract, interest and cost.
Testifying before Magistrate Clement Nkumbe Ngube, the witness told the tribunal that she started working with the bank since 2007, and that she knows the plaintiff.
She revealed that she worked with the plaintiff at the Human Resource Unit of the bank and in 2009-2010, the staff appraisal was conducted at the bank, but the Human Resource Unit did not participate, but they were informed.
"The appraisal committee comprises the group head and the management staff," she told the court.
She added that appraisal process was meant to look at the working output, attitude towards work, among others, for members of staff, and for locally recruited members.
The counsel for the defendant, Mene, applied to tender a list of the 2010 performance appraisal outcome, which was admitted and tendered in evidence.
"Myself and the MD wrote a memo on top of the list of the appraisal outcome in 2010, and the plaintiff's name was among," the witness told the tribunal.
She revealed that the appraisal committee has the mandate to upgrade and downgrade to any given rate a staff member.
"The plaintiff's first grade was B and was downgraded by the appraisal committee to C," she told the court.
The defence witness further told the court that the plaintiff's performance was below standard, due to several issues raised by their internal audit.
She further disclosed that the information on those issues were in the personal file of the plaintiff.
"With regard to set targets of appraisals, reports revealed, amongst other things, that the plaintiff's performance was below standard as the head of Transactions Services Unit," the defence witness added.
She testified that the conclusion of the outcome by the appraisal of the plaintiff stated that she should look for something challenging outside of the bank.
She adduced that the conclusion was communicated to the plaintiff by a letter, adding: "I wrote the names of staff that were counseled out of the system to look for opportunity outside."
She announced that the highest appraised rate for 2010 was A, and the lowest outcome was D.
The case adjourned till 24 March 2011 for cross-examination.